Skip to main content

About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
individually, much more, some of them at least, much more concerned with what's going on in vietnam. >> use all the change take place before your eyes. let me ask you this question. even though you saw the change taking place, when did you start thinking of the 60's as history? >> probably not until sometime in the 90's, the 80s or 90s. i'm pretty sure it wasn't until the 80's for instance a significant portion of my course syllabus which is 20th century history included a significant ratings on the 1960's. so maybe that is one answer to your question but of course a lot of people have been talking about the 60's even during the 60's. >> host: i've always been focused on books by one year. sometimes the historians like to talk about change across the time. that's pretty much what we like to do, and we like to talk about large swaths of time quite often in the decades. we even have this decade thing. but we rarely do a year, so there is a way that there is this close-up on the world on american society of a given moment in 1965. and is there a way that you can give a sense of how to unfold? in o
of equity and want to use it, the system should make judgments about how much to let them use. the system should allow flexibility and economic capacity and should invite all film is to think of homeownership and prepare for it. but shoko is that when i read this. what was driving a was more and more debt, more and more leverage. that was the only thing cne and freddie were interested in. their business as mortgages, said they wanted more of them. the bigger house, a lower down payment, higher mortgage. whatever it was infallibly to increase their profit potential because that's the system to make a private public system was devised. >> great comic thank you. we are delighted to have had the chance to discuss this outstanding book. thank you for all your questions. there will be more chance for questions and formally. there is a reception outside. hope he'll have the book and have bob autograph it. thank you very much and thanks to you and to our commentators. [applause] >> coming up, booktv presents "after words," the program were made by guest hosts to interview authors. this week, jame
that part. what makes the title useful is what happens with the civil-rights movement of american foreign policy. >> host: that the destruction is as a result of what it lbj did i a admire how you unfold the story. but it is important to understand make it clear to the degree that 1965 had johnson handled the war differently that maybe things would have been different. talk about that. >> it is not as awful as it now. try to find out what is there a point* where this could be avoided? 1965 was the time they bit the bullet several times and by this summer so heavily involved in in the combat that there was no getting out of it. this is the tragic thing about it coming he knew when he escalated the war united states and south vietnam would win or defeat it or invade north vietnam but that is the most they could help four. it was 1965. the nine states has 23,000 troops called military risers. this is about 6,000 more so in the space of a year he increased from 23,000. this was a considerable percentage increase but not a lot of people. the only combat that occurred was the gulf of tonkin cri
, and there is a way you can give us a sense of how this unfolds? in other words, how do you get to 1965? so we can better understand the terms of the conversation. how much change took place in 1965. >> guest: first, it's interesting how many books there are on individual years of the '60s, and i mention some of these in my preface. a lot of people are going to say, someone else said 1968. 1968 was a huge year. the tet offensive, johnson resigning, not going for another term. nixon's election, the assassination of martin luther king and bobby kennedy. the democratic party's wild convention in chicago. so, a lot of books on '68, a lot of '69, woodstock and altamont and that sort of thing. so, i'm afraid my book is by no means unique. there's also a very good book on 1964, which makes pretty much the same argument as i do, only he sets it a year earlier. i don't have any huge quarrel with that. i wouldn't say, look it, i'm the only person that's right about this. but '65 did seem to be the time, not the most dramatic. '68 probably was in terms of world-shattering memorable events. but it was a tame
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4